Crain v. State

• Decision Date: 10 February 1910
• Citation: 52 So. 31,166 Ala. 1
• Parties: CRAIN v. STATE.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

52 So. 31

166 Ala. 1

CRAIN v. STATE.

Supreme Court of Alabama

February 10, 1910

Rehearing Denied Feb. 26, 1910.

Appeal from Criminal Court, Jefferson County; S. L. Weaver, Judge.

George Crain was convicted of murder, and he appeals. Reversed and remanded.

The jury law referred to can be found in Acts 1907, p. 238, and the record shows that the jury was drawn under said act, and not under the previous act relative to the drawing of the juries.

The following charges were refused to the defendant:

"(1) The court charges the jury that the law presumes the defendant to be innocent of the commission of any crime and this presumption continues to grow in his favor step by step until you are satisfied beyond all reasonable doubt of his guilt, and you cannot find the defendant guilty of a crime within the indictment until the evidence within the case satisfies you beyond all reasonable doubt of his guilt; and so long as you, or any one of you, have a reasonable doubt as to the existence of any of the elements necessary to constitute any of the crime or crimes within the indictment, you should find the defendant not guilty." "(8) I charge you, gentlemen of the jury, that if either one of your minds has a reasonable doubt from all the evidence in this case of the guilt of the defendant, then it is your duty to render a verdict of not guilty."

Frank S. Andress, for appellant.

Alexander M. Garber, Atty. Gen., for the State.

DOWDELL C.J.

While it is true that much latitude is permissible upon the cross-examination of a witness touching his sincerity memory, etc., even to the asking of questions irrelevant to the issues in the case, yet it is a matter that must of necessity rest largely in the wise discretion of the trial court.

In the present case there was no dispute that the defendant shot and killed the deceased on the mentioned date, and consequently it was immaterial at what hour of the day it was done. The witness Merriwether testified on his direct examination that he looked at the clock just before the shooting, and it was 10 minutes past 11 o'clock. On his cross-examination he was asked where the hands of the clock were pointing, to which question the solicitor objected, and the objection was sustained. While the question was not an improper one as touching the knowledge and accuracy of the witness as to the precise time of the shooting, and might well have been permitted, we are unable to see that the defendant was prejudiced by its refusal, in view of the fact that the defendant did not deny the shooting of the deceased. We are satisfied that no injury resulted therefrom to the defendant and, such being the case, the ruling, if erroneous, should not constitute reversible error. Code 1907, § 6264.

In the laying of a predicate for the introduction of evidence of confessions made by the defendant, the question, "Were there any promises, threats, or inducements made to the defendant before the statements were made by him?" is not open to the objection that it called for a conclusion of the witness, and was properly allowed by the court.

When taken in connection with the declaration, made by the defendant after the shooting, that, if the deceased was not dead, he (defendant) would go back and finish him, the questions by the solicitor, "Did...